Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

I am a CK2 fan. Should I buy EU IV (or Vic II)?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The Fremen

The Fremen

First Lieutenant
36 Badges
Dec 6, 2012
280
100
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
Hi there guys, I saw the sale on steam and wanted to hear your opinions regarding purchasing EU IV or Vic II. I dislike super micro-management, however both games seem to be interesting (I tried both demos and liked in the overall EU IV better).

What do you suggest?
 
You should tell us what you like CK2 for in the first place. EU4 is about being the biggest fish in the pound. There are no internal affairs to speak of, it comes down purely to military power in most cases (unless you play countries that can safely organize colonies across the world). Save for national ideas technologies are all the same, making countries blend together too much for my liking. Diplomacy and geopolitics can be interesting, but you shouldn't count on something as complicated as CK2 has to offer in many cases (no intrigues to speak of, etc.). While it's still a good game (got 260 hours) and has the best UI I ever saw in a Paradox title so far I can't suggest you to buy it purely on you being CK2 fan. EU4 is different and you might end up disappointed. I know I am back to CK2 mostly due to internal politics, more possibilities (you can fail to hold your king title and still be able to do a lot) and intrigues. EU4 is about blobbing, plain and simple.
 
The Fremen said:
Hi there guys, I saw the sale on steam and wanted to hear your opinions regarding purchasing EU IV or Vic II. I dislike super micro-management, however both games seem to be interesting (I tried both demos and liked in the overall EU IV better).

What do you suggest?
Click to expand...
Do not, I repeat DO NOT play Victoria 2 before playing EU4.
 
I'm having a similar conundrum now, but as I already own CK2 & EU4, my only question is whether I should buy Vicky II or not. I like the RPG elements of CK2 more, & I find that EU4 gets pretty boring sometimes because there is nothing to do if you arent at war. In CK2 I can turn to look inside my own kingdom with factions & intrigue going on. Sadly, EU4 has none of that so if you arent warring there's just not much else to do besides build a few buildings.

I think I might like Vicky II cause apparently there's a lot of building & trading stuff you can do even when you arent in war, & it seems to focus less on war in general, so I'm thinking I might like it. I might end up picking it up before tomorrow when it goes off 50% off.....
 
Victoria II is much more niche. It's less accessible and MUCH more detail-oriented. It is an orgy of detail of the non-violent type, and it should be played by an experienced grand-strategy gamer, not the kind of person who makes a thread asking if he'd enjoy EU4 or Vic2.

So yeah, it depends on why you like CK2, but you'd probably enjoy EU4. The EU franchise is the original, and there's cool stuff in there for everybody.
 
I like CK2 because of the RPG elemnts. I like building my country of course, but also "building" my dynasty. It feels like it simulates the real words in terms of affairs between individuals.

What I seemed to find interesting in EUIV are a few things:
1. A friendly UI.
2. Different systems for different countries (i.e tribal/ nomade nations vs traditional European nations).
3. I also like the nation building, although the number of things you need to manage (ideas, what seems to be a much wider variety of options offered to a player and s on) seems to be a lot.


How much time does it take to learn at least basics of the game? Imho, CK2, for example, has the easiest learning curve out of all Paradox games.
 
If you dislike micromanagement, I would be weary of Victoria 2. Depending on the type of government your nation has handling all of the factories can become a very large task in micromanagement. There are also quite a few details you need to pay attention to, such as if your population (called POPs) are employed, getting the reforms they want, getting their life needs, are at risk of becoming militant, winning elections if you're a democracy, etc. I love the game, but it is definitely more complex than EUIV or CKII. It's age is also starting to show, its UI is nowhere near as friendly as that of EUIV.
 
3. I also like the nation building, although the number of things you need to manage (ideas, what seems to be a much wider variety of options offered to a player and s on) seems to be a lot.
Click to expand...
Ideas are much simpler than they seem to be.

2. Different systems for different countries (i.e tribal/ nomade nations vs traditional European nations).
Click to expand...
Government types and cultures are only affecting a few stats, technology, etc. The most what can be affected is your combat capabilities.

How much time does it take to learn at least basics of the game? Imho, CK2, for example, has the easiest learning curve out of all Paradox games.
Click to expand...
If you played the demo you should know everything or most of what the game has to offer.
 
I have both of them, and I like Victoria 2 more.
Its such a beautiful game, and its so fun to play.

EUIV is kinda boring, when you're not warring you're preparing to go to war.
Also, the monarch point system is REALLY REALLY stupid imo.

In vicky there is something to do when you're at peace, and there's the whole ideology thing.
 
Jokurr said:
If you dislike micromanagement, I would be weary of Victoria 2. Depending on the type of government your nation has handling all of the factories can become a very large task in micromanagement. There are also quite a few details you need to pay attention to, such as if your population (called POPs) are employed, getting the reforms they want, getting their life needs, are at risk of becoming militant, winning elections if you're a democracy, etc. I love the game, but it is definitely more complex than EUIV or CKII. It's age is also starting to show, its UI is nowhere near as friendly as that of EUIV.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I could never really get into Vicky. If you're hesitant about micro-management, it's less likely to appeal to you than EU4.
 
RX2000 said:
I'm having a similar conundrum now, but as I already own CK2 & EU4, my only question is whether I should buy Vicky II or not. I like the RPG elements of CK2 more, & I find that EU4 gets pretty boring sometimes because there is nothing to do if you arent at war. In CK2 I can turn to look inside my own kingdom with factions & intrigue going on. Sadly, EU4 has none of that so if you arent warring there's just not much else to do besides build a few buildings.

I think I might like Vicky II cause apparently there's a lot of building & trading stuff you can do even when you arent in war, & it seems to focus less on war in general, so I'm thinking I might like it. I might end up picking it up before tomorrow when it goes off 50% off.....
Click to expand...
You'd probably enjoy it. I've gone entire games with minimal war just trying to make myself an industrial power and prevent a communist takeover of my government, and in terms of 'role-play' and personality, I find it more similar to CK2 than EU4.
 
Mann42 said:
You'd probably enjoy it. I've gone entire games with minimal war just trying to make myself an industrial power and prevent a communist takeover of my government, and in terms of 'role-play' and personality, I find it more similar to CK2 than EU4.
Click to expand...
There is absolutely no role playing or personality in V2, in EU4 you have some personality of advisors and rulers.
 
I've only played V2 and EU4 a very little as compared to CK2's ludicrous amount, but Vicky feels much more my sort of thing than EU4 despite it being rougher round the edges than either CK2 or EU4, and my not being very good at it.

I'm heavily into the vassal management side of CK2, so I guess I just end up thinking of my PoPs and political factions in Vicky as odd types of vassals to keep happy and try to steer in the direction I want them to go, even if the controls are a lot more intricate and obtuse than in CK2 :)

EU4 on the other hand leaves me a bit cold, for all it being very pretty and having the smoothest experience, I haven't really found that same handle of 'what do my guys want? How to do I get it for them or persuade them to want something else?' to engage my interest. I'm sure there are other handles, but that seems like it is my main one, and EU4 hasn't scratched that itch for me so far, so yes I think it does depend on what you like about CK2.
 
al3xytp said:
Sure, but I doubt that you can call your ruler's stat and advisor stats roleplaying. In my opinion.
Click to expand...
I haven't said it. Neither V2, EU4, HoI3 can be compared to CK2 character focused game type. The only recent game by PDS which is similar to CK2 is sengoku, although it sort of only deals with Japan and therefore it is much more limited in scope.
 
yclept said:
EU4 on the other hand leaves me a bit cold, for all it being very pretty and having the smoothest experience, I haven't really found that same handle of 'what do my guys want? How to do I get it for them or persuade them to want something else?' to engage my interest. I'm sure there are other handles, but that seems like it is my main one, and EU4 hasn't scratched that itch for me so far, so yes I think it does depend on what you like about CK2.
Click to expand...

Totally this. The only time I really have fun in EU4 is when I totally trash some countries army & completely overrun them & watch them be completely helpless with no manpower left as I crush them. Other than that, its kind of boring & there just isnt anything to do really during peacetime besides build a couple buildings & send ships to protect trade nodes.

In CK2 on the other hand, I'm always busy doing something. From looking externally to where I want to expand next, to looking internally to excommunicate/imprison/execute any pesky vassals I dont like, etc, there's always something to do. I just find that missing in EU4. Hopefully Vicky II will be more like CK2 for me. Maybe I can try to look at the POPs as vassals. :)
 
Vicky 2 is, I think, the best Paradox game. I sense, HOI series may be better, but for some reason, I never managed to get myself into it.

Having said that, if you are into CKII because it creates great stories and the general hilarity it offers, then probably best to stay away from other Paradox games... if you are into CKII because you love plotting your way from being a count to being the Emperor, then you should definitely check those other games out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back